WITH just 64 days to Brexit, nerves are beginning to jangle audibly not only in London but Brussels too.
It is perhaps a sign of desperation when in our system of constitutional monarchy, someone holds up their finger and suggests the answer to a potential problem is getting HMQ involved.
And so it was the darling of the Brexiteer hardliners, Jacob Rees-Mogg, who piped up to suggest if the Remainers were on the point of preventing a no-deal outcome, the Queen should be called upon to prorogue parliament.
His fear is the amendment to extend the Article 50 process to the year-end - to stop a no-deal outcome - led by Labour’s Yvette Cooper, is gaining traction; on Wednesday afternoon she held “positive” talks with Jeremy Corbyn.
If Labour officially backed it, then it could get through and show Parliament was wresting control of the Brexit process from the executive.
As MPs continued to table amendments to next Tuesday’s indicative vote on Brexit, our old friend Michel Barnier helpfully appeared to say a) there would be no Brussels approval to extend the Article 50 process unless Parliament agreed on a Plan B and b) introducing a time-limit on the backstop was a non-starter as it would render it useless.
Earlier this week, the Prime Minister claimed there was not a parliamentary majority for a People’s Vote; given Mr Corbyn’s position, she could be right. The SNP’s Ian Blackford admitted without the chief comrade on board, the chances of another EU poll are zero.
So, come next Tuesday the options could narrow. If a People’s Vote gets eliminated, so too might Norway-Plus and Canada-Plus. The battleground could be over Ms Cooper’s amendment.
Another proposal to set a sunset clause of December 2021 was also retabled.
The PM is hoping that this gets majority backing, so she can go to Brussels and say if the EU27 wants to avoid a no-deal outcome, it will have to budge on the backstop.
It could be that it will take a whites-of-their-eyes’ moment to get Mr Barnier and his colleagues to give way.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here